From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752914Ab2CHGAc (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 01:00:32 -0500 Received: from serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp ([222.151.198.100]:46818 "EHLO serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751376Ab2CHGAa (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 01:00:30 -0500 Message-ID: <4F584AFC.9070300@oss.ntt.co.jp> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:00:28 +0900 From: =?UTF-8?B?RmVybmFuZG8gTHVpcyBWw6F6cXVleiBDYW8=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Eric W. Biederman" CC: Don Zickus , linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@elte.hu, Yinghai Lu , akpm@linux-foundation.org, vgoyal@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] boot: add early NMI counter References: <20120216172735.GX9751@redhat.com> <20120216215603.GH9751@redhat.com> <20120217195430.GO9751@redhat.com> <20120220151419.GU9751@redhat.com> <20120221135934.GF26998@redhat.com> <4F573E1C.2060909@oss.ntt.co.jp> <4F573E74.5040504@oss.ntt.co.jp> <4F573EF0.1080501@oss.ntt.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/08/2012 01:50 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao writes: > >> Subject: [PATCH] boot: add early NMI counter >> >> From: Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao >> >> We currently ignore early NMIs but it would be nice to be able to >> know whether they actually occurred. >> >> This patch adds an early NMI counter and exports it trough >> /proc/interrupts with the name of ENM (Early NMI). > For a userspace interface I suspect we just want to dump the count > into the NMI counter. > > It probably makes sense to have a separate variable in early boot like > you do, but then about the time we setup the normal NMI handler move the > NMI count over and possibly do something like reboot if that is our > policy. I am fine with either approach. I guess that is the x86 maintainers' call. Ingo, Thomas, Peter, what do you think? Should I add a new entry to /proc/interrupts or move over the early NMI count to the existing per-cpu NMI counter? Thanks, Fernando